Does someone know when and were the very last NYC 4-6-4 and 4-8-4 runs took place? Also, where and when were the last of these engines scrapped? (Perhaps the greatest tech-heritage misdeed of the 20th century.)

Bill Yoder

wyoder50@compuserve.com

> Does someone know when and were the very
> last NYC 4-6-4 and 4-8-4 runs took place?
> Also, where and when were the last of these
> engines scrapped? (Perhaps the greatest
> tech-heritage misdeed of the 20th century.)

> Bill Yoder

Others know more than I on this topic, but I believe both types ended their lives on the Big Four out of Cincinnati, in 1956. I have heard that the Smithsonian wanted a Hudson, but that the NYC wouldn't talk to them. Same sort of attitude Stuart Saunders employed when he gutted N&W steam and its proud heritage.

justighe@bright.net

> Others know more than I on this topic, but I
> believe both types ended their lives on the
> Big Four out of Cincinnati, in 1956. I have
> heard that the Smithsonian wanted a Hudson,
> but that the NYC wouldn't talk to them. Same
> sort of attitude Stuart Saunders employed
> when he gutted N&W steam and its proud
> heritage.

Doctor Roberts at the MOT tried to get a hudson in the 50's and the NYC (don't remember who) told him that none of their steam engines was worth saving. Later, we did manage to get Mohawk
2933.

j.nansen@worldnet.att.net

> Doctor Roberts at the MOT tried to get a
> hudson in the 50's and the NYC (don't
> remember who) told him that none of their
> steam engines was worth saving. Later, we
> did manage to get Mohawk
> 2933.

Jack:

Glad you did! Number 2933 has the "family resemblance" to a J1.

Les Beckman (HVRM)


midlandblb@cs.com

> Doctor Roberts at the MOT tried to get a
> hudson in the 50's and the NYC (don't
> remember who) told him that none of their
> steam engines was worth saving. Later, we
> did manage to get Mohawk
> 2933.
Is this the St. Louis-area site?? In brief, how did the 2933 wind up there??

justighe@bright.net

> Is this the St. Louis-area site?? In brief,
> how did the 2933 wind up there??

Yes, the Museum of Transportation (formerly called the National Museum of Transport) is in the St. Louis area.
I don't remember the circumstances, but we received it in June of 1963. Later this week I'll get in the file and let you know.
I seem to remember that the locomotive was used as a stationary boiler. The engine is in good condition considering that it has been out in the elements 50 years.
As a matter of fact, it was one of the engines that the Steam Train ramrod considered for rebuilding, but settled on the 1522 because the lagging had been removed from the boiler.
(Since I'm an ex Frisco man I think it was the best descision).

j.nansen@worldnet.att.net

Too bad a group or organization was not saavy or prescient enough to PURCHASE a Hudson or Niagara outright.

Monday morning quarterbacking ? Yes, of course.

> Does someone know when and were the very
> last NYC 4-6-4 and 4-8-4 runs took place?
> Also, where and when were the last of these
> engines scrapped? (Perhaps the greatest
> tech-heritage misdeed of the 20th century.)

> Bill Yoder


newhaven0401@verizon.net

> Too bad a group or organization was not
> saavy or prescient enough to PURCHASE a
> Hudson or Niagara outright.

> Monday morning quarterbacking ? Yes, of
> course.

Hey man! That was back in the '50's.
Darn few of us had much disposable income and there was no push to buy artifacts. It was too easy to get donations.
The MOT was turning down offers of equipment because of lack of space.
We couldn't get a NYC Hudson so we got a 4-6-4 from the NKP.

j.nansen@worldnet.att.net

> We couldn't get a NYC Hudson so we got a
> 4-6-4 from the NKP.

And thank goodness you took it! The NKP Hudson is a beauty, and sadly, the last of her kind as well, after the Paulsen Spence debacle.

I would be interested in hearing what locomotives were turned down by the MOT. This isn't as a criticism, mind you, but I'd like to here what was offered and what was not saved because of the premium on space.


glueck@maine.edu

> And thank goodness you took it! The NKP
> Hudson is a beauty, and sadly, the last of
> her kind as well, after the Paulsen Spence
> debacle.

> I would be interested in hearing what
> locomotives were turned down by the MOT.
> This isn't as a criticism, mind you, but I'd
> like to here what was offered and what was
> not saved because of the premium on space.
I read somewhere, recently, that one of the rejects was a MILW A-Class 4-4-2. Ouch......

justighe@bright.net

> I read somewhere, recently, that one of the
> rejects was a MILW A-Class 4-4-2. Ouch......

Yes one was a MILW Hiawatha 4-4-2, and I screamed bloody murder at the time. Got Doc to change his mind, but by that time the engine was too far gone.
I can remember that the same thing happened with MStL 502, a neat 1925 Brooks pacific that the Louie had dolled up with a stainless steel boiler jacket and skirts on the running boards.
It had appeared at one of the world fairs and was a favorite of the president of the road.
I screamed louder on this one, because I was raised on the StL and that is still my pet railroad. Again Doc changed his mind too late.
There were others that I can't remember. That's a long time ago.

j.nansen@worldnet.att.net

> Yes one was a MILW Hiawatha 4-4-2, and I
> screamed bloody murder at the time. Got Doc
> to change his mind, but by that time the
> engine was too far gone.
> I can remember that the same thing happened
> with MStL 502, a neat 1925 Brooks pacific
> that the Louie had dolled up with a
> stainless steel boiler jacket and skirts on
> the running boards.
> It had appeared at one of the world fairs
> and was a favorite of the president of the
> road.
> I screamed louder on this one, because I was
> raised on the StL and that is still my pet
> railroad. Again Doc changed his mind too
> late.
> There were others that I can't remember.
> That's a long time ago.

Just as a note of interest, the MOT published a catalog of the collections in 1967. The covers are a picture of the main exhibit area (at that time). If you could find a copy of it, you would understand the problem of space.

j.nansen@worldnet.att.net

Too easy to get donations ???
I guess I need to qualify my remarks.

I was speaking about the Northeast-the home of
post WWII, financially moribund railroading. New York State, CT and the rest of the New England states.

As near as I can tell, there was not a single modern , "fullsized" (4-6-4 or larger) steam locomotive preserved within the region. The oft-cited reason was the financial condition of the road in question. That may or may not be the entire explanation-but who knows ? I am a contemporary of the RS-11 and GP-9, so I choose not to argue the point.

However, I will argue your point about disposable income. A man of modest means, Jim Bradley of Stonington CT, made the decision to preserve some New Haven heavyweight passenger cars and did so.
Five cars, to be exact. The heartening part of the story is that, after his passing, all five of the cars were preserved for yet... a second time.
It was rumored that Jim was interested in a NH DL-109. Had he been able to accomplish that feat, some of us would be speaking of the "hows" and the "whys" of restoration of that item.

My point is that Jim was one of the few able to (using the jargon of today) think outside of the box. Too bad others weren't so inclined.

> Hey man! That was back in the '50's.
> Darn few of us had much disposable income
> and there was no push to buy artifacts. It
> was too easy to get donations.
> The MOT was turning down offers of equipment
> because of lack of space.
> We couldn't get a NYC Hudson so we got a
> 4-6-4 from the NKP.


newhaven0401@verizon.net

> Yes one was a MILW Hiawatha 4-4-2, and I
> screamed bloody murder at the time. Got Doc
> to change his mind, but by that time the
> engine was too far gone.
> I can remember that the same thing happened
> with MStL 502, a neat 1925 Brooks pacific
> that the Louie had dolled up with a
> stainless steel boiler jacket and skirts on
> the running boards.
> It had appeared at one of the world fairs
> and was a favorite of the president of the
> road.
> I screamed louder on this one, because I was
> raised on the StL and that is still my pet
> railroad. Again Doc changed his mind too
> late.
> There were others that I can't remember.
> That's a long time ago.

Jack:

Thanks for your insight. The failure to save a Milwaukee Road streamlined Hiawatha 4-4-2 is a shame, but understandable. MoT already had an example of a 4-4-2 from the C&NW at that time. Your note about "Louie" 4-6-2 #502 was interesting. I hauled out my copy of Morning Sun's "MINNEAPOLIS & ST.LOUIS in Color" Book and there on page 22 is a photo of the Pacific. The photo was reportedly taken in 1949 at the Chicago Railroad Fair and according to the caption, the 502 was sent out for scrap immediately after the Fair closed. BTW, according to the book, she was built by Brooks as part of a five engine order in 1921, not 1925. I agree with you that she sure was a pretty thing!

You mentioned that you "screamed bloody murder" over the decision by Doc Roberts on the Hiawatha 4-4-2. Do you recall if there were any initial decisions by Doc Roberts that were overturned by you (or others at the museum) on appeal? In other words, did something come to MoT that he had originally turned down?

The NYC Mohawk is one of the few cases where a SECOND example of a wheel arrangement was added to the collection (the Frisco 4-8-2 was already on the roster when NYC 2933 was added for instance.) Why the exception in that case?

Les Beckman (HVRM)

midlandblb@cs.com

> Too easy to get donations ???
> I guess I need to qualify my remarks.

> I was speaking about the Northeast-the home
> of
> post WWII, financially moribund railroading.
> New York State, CT and the rest of the New
> England states.

> As near as I can tell, there was not a
> single modern , "fullsized" (4-6-4
> or larger) steam locomotive preserved within
> the region. The oft-cited reason was the
> financial condition of the road in question.
> That may or may not be the entire
> explanation-but who knows ? I am a
> contemporary of the RS-11 and GP-9, so I
> choose not to argue the point.

> However, I will argue your point about
> disposable income. A man of modest means,
> Jim Bradley of Stonington CT, made the
> decision to preserve some New Haven
> heavyweight passenger cars and did so.
> Five cars, to be exact. The heartening part
> of the story is that, after his passing, all
> five of the cars were preserved for yet... a
> second time.
> It was rumored that Jim was interested in a
> NH DL-109. Had he been able to accomplish
> that feat, some of us would be speaking of
> the "hows" and the
> "whys" of restoration of that
> item.

> My point is that Jim was one of the few able
> to (using the jargon of today) think outside
> of the box. Too bad others weren't so
> inclined.

There is always an exception.
The first steam engine received at MOT was CNW
class D, 1015 which was purchased by a director of the "organization."
As far as I know, only two other locomotives in the collection were purchased; the GG-1 and the Daniel Nason.

j.nansen@worldnet.att.net